Question — Bontempi, Palladium Theologicum V · from Schola Thomistica
Question VI: Whether initial and filial fear differ specifically
We must discern the object of each, that we may perceive the distinction of the habits.
Oportet utriusque obiectum discernere, ut distinctionem habituum percipiamus.
Concerning the object of Initial Fear they say that its medium is between the object of servile Fear, which is punishment; and the object of filial fear, which is the reason of the offense of God. Therefore the object of Initial Fear is both offense and punishment; but offense the more principal. The object of filial Fear, moreover, has for its object the evil of fault, inasmuch as it is an offense of God, not simply, but attending to the supreme reverence of the Father.
Circa obiectum Timoris initialis aiunt, medium esse inter obiectum Timoris servilis, quod est poena; et obiectum timoris filialis, quod est ratio offensae Dei. Itaque obiectum Timoris Initialis est tam offensa, quam poena; sed principalior offensa. Obiectum vero Timoris filialis habet pro obiecto malum culpae, ut est offensa Dei, non simpliciter, sed attendens summam Patris reverentiam.
It is proved by the Saintly Doctor on the seven gifts. On the Gift of Fear, and here dist. 36, art. 2, question 1, because it arises from filial charity, by which we love God with no respect had to our own advantage or disadvantage; and in this way it fears separation from God, as the Saintly Doctor shows dub. 3, the text being as follows: that it is not a fear of separation from God inasmuch as it is our good, as Durandus thinks dist. 3, dist. 34, saying that the pain of sense is regarded and fled from by servile fear; but the pain of loss by filial Fear; surely a fear of separation here would be from the love of concupiscence, and not from perfect Charity, that is, the love of friendship, as Caspensis notes disput. 2, sect. 1, num. 5.
Probatur a S. Doctore de septem donis. De Dono Timoris, et hic dist. 36. art. 2. quaest. 1. quia oritur ex charitate filiali, qua diligimus Deum, nullo habito respectu ad nostrum commodum, vel incommodum et hoc modo timet separationem a Deo, ut ostendit S. Doctor dub. 3. litt. ita, ut non sit timor separationis a Deo, quatenus est bonum nostrum, ut putat Durandus 3. dist. 34. dicens, poenam sensus respici, et fugi a timore servili; poenam vero damni a Timore filiali; sane timor hic separationis esset ab amore concupiscentiae, non autem a Charitate perfecta, seu amore amicitiae, ut notat Caspensis disput. 2. sect. 1. num. 5.
Hence therefore I assert that these loves are divided into diverse ones, at least modally.
Hinc igitur assero, hos amores dividi in diversos, saltem modaliter.
It is proved by St. Bonaventure first, because thus the Fears are divided by D. Augustine, by the Master, and by other Fathers into Initial, Filial, etc.
Probatur a S. Bonavent. primo, quia sic Timores dividuntur a D. Augustino, a Magistro, et aliis Patribus in Initialem, Filialem, etc.
Next, because the principal objects are diverse, as I showed, for Initial regards punishment more principally than offense: But filial flees principally the offense of God.
Deinde, quia diversa sunt obiecta principalia, ut ostendi, nam Initialis respicit principalius poenam, quam offensam: At filialis principalius offensam Dei refugit.
You will object. If one of two opposites is not multiplied, neither is the other multiplied; but Hope, the opposite of Fear, is not multiplied: Therefore neither is Fear.
Obiicies. Si unum oppositorum non multiplicatur; neque multiplicatur alterum; sed Spes, opposita Timori, non multiplicatur: Ergo neque Timor.
The SAINTLY DOCTOR answers, that the major is true of the division of univocals, as Aristotle testifies in the Post-praedamenta, chapter on opposites; and Metaphysics 3, tract 4. But hope and fear are not opposed univocally. Fear, moreover, is divided more than Hope, because the latter always tends toward one supreme good; but Fear flees from many evils principally, according to the diverse states, as I said.
Respondet S. Doctor, maiorem esse veram de divisione univocorum, ut testatur Aristoteles in post praedic. cap. de oppositis: et 3. Metaph. tract. 4. At spes, et timor non opponuntur univoce. Dividitur autem magis Timor, quam Spes, quia haec semper in unum bonum tendit summum; Timor vero e multis malis, principalius fugit, secundum diversos status, ut dixi.
You will object secondly. More and less do not vary the species: but initial and filial Fear differ as the less perfect from the more perfect: Therefore.
Obiicies secundo. Magis, et minus non variant speciem: sed Timor initialis, et filialis differunt, ut minus perfectum a magis perfecto: Ergo.
The SAINTLY DOCTOR answers, that there is not there on that account a specific difference; otherwise we should have to posit also another middle fear, that is, of the proficient. Then he answers that they do not differ only as the less perfect from the more perfect; but by the principal motive, although one in a certain way supposes the other, and what was formal with respect to the initial becomes material to the filial.
Respondet S. Doctor, non esse ibi proptiam differentiam; alioqui deberemus etiam alterum timorem medium ponere, idest proficientem. Deinde respondet, non differre solum, ut minus perfectum a magis perfecto; sed per motivum principale, licet unum quodammodo supponat alterum, et quod erat formale respectu initialis, fiat materiale filiali.
You will object thirdly. If it is pleasing thus to distinguish Fear; one can also distinguish Love, from which Fear remains, into Initial and Perfect: But Love is not distinguished in species by these differences: Therefore neither is Fear.
Obiicies tertio. Si libet sic distinguere Timorem; potest distinguere se Amorem, a quo Timor manet, in Initialem, et Perfectum: Sed Amor per has differentias non distinguitur specie: Ergo neque Timor.
The SAINTLY DOCTOR answers by denying the parity, because love has no diverse motives, but is perfected only by reason of state.
Respondet S. Doctor negando paritatem, quia amor non habet diversa motiva, sed solum ratione status perficitur.
You will object fourthly. As is the univocal cause, so is the effect; but both these Fears arise from gratuitous love, from D. Augustine Tractate 43 on John. Therefore.
Obiicies quarto. Qualis causa univoca, talis effectus; sed uterque iste Timor oritur ex amore gratuito ex D. Augustino Tract. 43. in Ioan. Ergo.
The SAINTLY DOCTOR answers that love is not the univocal cause of Fear, whence from one love are generated not only diverse differences of Fears; but even three genera of affections, as D. Augustine teaches Tractate 9 on the epistle of John.
Respondet S. Doctor amorem non esse causam univocam Timoris, unde ex uno amore genitantur, non modo diversae differentiae Timorum; sed etiam tria genera affectionum, ut docet D. Augustinus Tract. 9. in epist. Ioan.
You will object fifthly. If there are several gratuitous Fears: therefore the gifts of the Holy Spirit are eight.
Obiicies quinto. Si plures sint Timores gratuiti: ergo dona Spiritus sancti sunt octo.
The SAINTLY DOCTOR answers, that one fear, which is the initial, is included in the other as to what is said of nobility; and therefore is included in the one Spirit of the Fear of the Lord.
Respondet S. Doctor, unum timorem, qui est initialis, includi in alio quo ad id, quod dicit nobilitatis; et ideo includi in uno Spiritu Timoris Domini.
You will object sixthly. If these Fears differ, because Initial flees also punishment, and Filial the offense of God: Then thus: In the offense there is to offend God, which is fault; and to be separated from God through enmity, which are diverse: Therefore two Fears.
Obiicies sexto. Si Timores isti differunt, quia Initialis refugit etiam poenam, et Filialis offensam Dei, Tunc sic: In offensa est Deum offendere, quod est culpa; et a Deo separari per inimicitiam, quae sunt diversa: Ergo duo Timores.
The SAINTLY DOCTOR answers. That initial Fear regards two things; but principally one, consequentially the other: Similarly also the Filial; therefore there is one principal motive, diverse in both, whence the Fears ought to vary. The reason of the offense, inasmuch as it signifies the separation, which is a punishment, is less regarded by the Filial; and principally by the Initial.
Respondet S. Doctor. Timorem initialem ad duo respicere; sed ad unum principaliter; ad alterum consequenter: Similiter et Filialem; ideo est unum motivum principale, diversum in ambobus, unde variari debent Timores. Ratio vero offensae, prout dicit separationem, quae est poena, minus respicitur a Filiali; et principaliter ab Initiali.